> -----Original Message-----
> From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de]
> Sent: Wednesday, 2006 January 25 14:31
> To: Webb Roberts
> Cc: Grosso, Paul; www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org; Bjoern Hoehrmann
> Subject: Re: XLink 1.1: 5.4 "URI reference" unclear
>
> Webb Roberts wrote:
> >
> > On 1/25/2006 Grosso, Paul wrote:
> >> The XML Core WG reconsidered the issue and had consensus to
> >> stick with the better-known term "relative URI".
> >
> > Is there a normative definition available for "relative
> URI"? It seems
> > that it was defined in RFC 2396, which is explicitly
> obsoleted by RFC
> > 3986. It would seem preferrable to go with the term
> "relative reference
> > to a URI" as defined in RFC 3986.
> > ...
>
> +1.
>
> The term is obsoleted, so please use what RFC3986 does.
Bjoern, Webb, Julian,
The XML Core WG now plans to replace the wording (LC WD):
If the URI reference is relative, its absolute version
must be computed by the method of [XML Base] before use.
which is currently in the lastest editor's draft as:
If the value of the href attribute is a relative URI, or
results in a relative URI after escaping, its absolute
version must be computed by the method of [XML Base] before use.
with:
If the value of the href attribute is a relative reference
(as defined in [RFC 3986], also known as "relative URI" in
earlier RFCs), or results in a relative reference after
escaping, its absolute version must be computed by the
method of [XML Base] before use.
If we don't hear to the contrary before February 15,
we will assume this change adequately addresses
your concerns with respect to this comment.
paul